GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    But I am against any copyright beyond forcing attribution to the original creator.

      • Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Here’s your works cited for any generative AI:

        Humanity. “The Entire Publicly Accessible Internet .” The World Wide Web, , 1 Jan. 1983, WWW.org.

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        AI creators, at least the open source ones, are usually pretty open about where they got the training data for their model

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        At the very least, every AI should be able to spit out a comprehensive list of all the material it used for training. And it should be capable of removing any specific item and regenerating its algorithm.

        This is a fundamental requirement of the technology itself to function. What happens if one the training materials has a retraction? Or if the authors admit they used AI to generate it? You need to purge that knowledge to keep the AI healthy and accurate.